Friday Free For All
It’s time for our regular open topic Friday Free-for-all post here on VancouverCondo.info!
- But why are they really selling?
- Vancouver sales slow to 2001 levels
- Keep building stuff and they’ll keep coming
- Canadian prices (except Edmonton) rising
- 40 years terms add fuel to the fire
- TD Chief Executive gets all gloomy
- AAA rating not what it used to be
- Bernanke: Housing crash not Feds problem
- An eye out for mortgage fraud
So what are you seeing out there? Post your news, links, and anecdotes here and have a great weekend!
RSS 2.0 comments feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.
April 4th, 2008 at 5:04 am
“Housing market to sink after Games’
http://www.canada.com/theprovi.....fdcdf10c66
…I find myself humming my favorite David Bowie tune for all those RE people out there:
“Turn and face the strange CHANGES”
April 4th, 2008 at 5:59 am
“Also, Adamache said, on average, homes are selling for 98 per cent of their list price, which is also consistent with a seller’s market.”
Reaching the bottom of the spin barrel? What a useless stat.
“People are cognizant of risks to real estate in a way that, two years ago, they weren’t entertaining,” Somerville added.”
How about you Tsur? Didn’t quite speak up then did you?
“[Sales are] still very high by historical standards,” Adamache added. ”
Yes, but dropping like a rock. You have demonstrable extrapolation skills. Use them.
Then a whole bunch of talks about a balanced market, which is I presume is a milestone the way to an inversely unbalanced market (supply exceeding demand)
April 4th, 2008 at 6:28 am
good take on the obfuscation factor
the spin is starting to get me dizzy
tiny url for province article
http://tinyurl.com/45yvl2
April 4th, 2008 at 6:39 am
April 4th, 2008 at 7:19 am
For the last 20 years or so, a free market ideology has been dominant in government and in crown corporations. The latter are expected to maximize profits. This even effects the Canadian Mint. The maximization of profits ususally comes with assuming greater risks.
Beacause of the latter, CMHC sees it as their job to pump housing prices and because declining housing prices will lead to CMHC to suffer insurance losses, their employees will loose their jobs, the CEO will be fired, if the losses are scandalous he will be called before a parliamentary committee, if its bad enough there will be an inquiry into the business of CMHC. It will emerge that CMHC big wigs have been aggressively wined and dined and sent on vacations by the big banks and therefore were in a conflict of interest when they took increasing risk.
Everyone at CMHC has an interest in keeping the boom going.
April 4th, 2008 at 7:24 am
In the wake of the developing Canadian housing bust, I expect that CMHC will emerge as a neutered corporation fenced in by rigid rules.
April 4th, 2008 at 8:07 am
April 4th, 2008 at 8:09 am
One would think, but don’t forget we live in the land of Angelo Mozillo, Bear Stearns and Paulson.
I suppose we’ll see how much of a Republican wannabe Harper is soon enough.
April 4th, 2008 at 8:16 am
April 4th, 2008 at 8:57 am
I’m going over to Victoria for a few days, so I’ll have my ears perked up. We’ll see if I have anything to report.
April 4th, 2008 at 9:01 am
Clean Technology/socially responsible investing and alternate energy appear to be poised to be the next bubble, if you get out in time it could work great and you could buy in at 40% off todays RE prices.
bubble 1 “the internet isn’t going away”
bubble 2 “everyone needs a place to live, the olympics the olympics!”
and next it’ll be “we only have one earth, we have to save it”
Various reasons for this idea are:
The boomers will eat it up and they have the money and a lot of them have a history of being socially active compared to their parents’ generation
People like to exit sectors where they’ve been burned and clean energy/ clean tech hasn’t burned anyone yet.
Governments will most likely help out and in some cases mandate change. For example the companies that clean the toxic water in the tar sands should have business for some time.
Blah Blah Blah
I have no way of knowing if anyone takes me seriously and I don’t know much anyways but hopefully you’ll consider the idea. I can keep going here but don’t want to put anyone to sleep.
It seems like that sector may be a good way to beat inflation while the market tanks.
April 4th, 2008 at 9:02 am
Up until just a couple of months ago he was arguing that I was mad not to buy, and that I should let him set up a mortgage for me on something, anything.
As of yesterday he now believes we’re due for a correction quite soon and that real estate is a bad thing to invest in at the moment - he talked about a real sea change in the attitudes of the people he meets with.
April 4th, 2008 at 9:17 am
Well of course what “free market” ideology really believes in is that market intervention is good as long as it benefits the big players at the expense of the taxpayers. Right, Al? Right, Ben? Right, CMHC?
April 4th, 2008 at 9:30 am
April 4th, 2008 at 10:15 am
April 4th, 2008 at 10:27 am
In the wake of the developing Canadian housing bust, I expect that CMHC will emerge as a neutered corporation fenced in by rigid rules.
Dare to dream! CMHC holds a fair amount of responsibility for this bubble, but that doesn’t mean that there will be repercussions.
April 4th, 2008 at 10:55 am
April 4th, 2008 at 11:04 am
Can you please provide data/analysis that shows how CMHC has improved affordability for Canadians since introducing the new improved lax lending standards?
Please include a sensitivity analysis to show how affordability is affected at different interest rates in the range of 0-10%. Thanks!
BTW don’t feel too bad if you’re too “realtarded” to perform such an analysis, Tsur Somerville can’t either.
April 4th, 2008 at 11:05 am
Harrumph. Well, that’s one way of looking at it. Another way they could have fulfilled their mandate by helping to moderate actual prices, rather than focusing on affordability. They might have contributed to this by keeping the lending standards where they were, thus keeping risky loans out of the market, thus lsowing activity and keeping the bubble from getting too large.
No?
April 4th, 2008 at 11:18 am
Actually you could look at the CMHC as fulfilling their mandate by driving prices ever higher thereby sucking more and more speculators (and irresponsible FTB’s) into the market. This results in increasing inventory to satisfy the perceived demand and ultimately (after prices return to reality) resulting in plenty of affordable housing for responsible Canadians.
April 4th, 2008 at 11:39 am
Well that obviously snowballs. Talking up prices will keep the portfolio safe, but then they are required to take on riskier and riskier loans. It could well be that they are just pushing doom forward, hoping to retire before it all falls apart. That is one of the problem in the corporate world. Many CEO’s are within a years of retirement and are only interested in looking good until their options are fully vested.
April 4th, 2008 at 11:56 am
April 4th, 2008 at 12:04 pm
April 4th, 2008 at 12:04 pm
April 4th, 2008 at 12:09 pm
April 4th, 2008 at 12:21 pm
April 4th, 2008 at 12:25 pm
April 4th, 2008 at 12:28 pm
Why would an expert from Ottawa opinion not count? Ah yes, only the opinion of poeple living in Vancouver counts. Think inside the bubble and not outside the bubble.
April 4th, 2008 at 12:29 pm
April 4th, 2008 at 12:35 pm
April 4th, 2008 at 12:37 pm
If you’re investing in real estate shouldn’t you consider what its rental income would be? Our prices are approaching New Yorks to buy, but while CMHC says the average 2 bedroom apartment rent in Vancouver last year was $1086, Forbes shows the median 2 bedroom apartment rent in New York to be $4000.
“I own a condo downtown and I don’t think it is going to go down”
April 4th, 2008 at 12:42 pm
April 4th, 2008 at 12:50 pm
BTW are there any recent (last 0-5 years) home purchasers that aren’t optimistic about the near term future of Vancouver RE prices?
April 4th, 2008 at 12:55 pm
April 4th, 2008 at 12:56 pm
April 4th, 2008 at 12:58 pm
cio.
April 4th, 2008 at 1:16 pm
April 4th, 2008 at 1:17 pm
You obviously grew up in Delta and are about 21. This is your first experience outside of your parents house and your unsophisticated parents have lent you a small amount of cash to buy a small crappy condo simply because they heard that this is what people did to make money.
Downtown is the place to be, a lot of us bought a long time ago or didn’t and are choosing to invest the thousands of dollars that they are saving into other investments, yes I know this is overwhelming but there are other ways to make money.
Your inability to comprehend or answer any of the question above prove that you’re an imbecile.
You aren’t going to meet your friends at the Cafe, you are going to work at Starbucks.
Enjoy your condo, when you get off your shift look up negative equity.
Idiot
April 4th, 2008 at 1:19 pm
Ok, now I really have to go
April 4th, 2008 at 1:20 pm
(that’s why I love it)
April 4th, 2008 at 1:21 pm
I have a sister and BIL who moved to San Diego 1.5 years ago and against advice bought themselves a brand new BOSA condo. He really wishes he were a bitter renter now (she’s oblivious). Comparable units are listed at 20-45% less than he paid for his. I feel sorry for him, but I feel even more sorry for myself as it seems too cruel to phone him up and scream TOLD YOU SO into the receiver.
April 4th, 2008 at 1:24 pm
April 4th, 2008 at 1:30 pm
lol
April 4th, 2008 at 1:42 pm
April 4th, 2008 at 1:43 pm
April 4th, 2008 at 1:53 pm
April 4th, 2008 at 1:57 pm
Prices will fall before the Olympics. The specuvestors all think they will be brilliant and unload right after the games. Smart money will be long gone before the first Gold medal is handed out.
April 4th, 2008 at 1:59 pm
April 4th, 2008 at 2:01 pm
April 4th, 2008 at 2:08 pm
April 4th, 2008 at 2:11 pm
As well there are other not so bright thinkers that actually believe the world doesn’t know about Vancouver and after watching the games they will all flock here to live. Just like they did for Turin. You know Turin, the place everyone wants to live.
Actually I think a strong agrument can be made for why the Olympics will hurt RE prices here long term. Massive debt, bad press ( it will basically rain for 2 weeks and the world will be watching), Overbuilding.
April 4th, 2008 at 2:13 pm
Some people believe that they can kick out their tenants, rent their crappy 1 bedroom shoebox out for $25,000 for two weeks then sell at a profit.
The connection is people are stupid. The same crap was said about Expo 86, look where that went.
April 4th, 2008 at 2:13 pm
So for now we make do with economics based on pot and construction and most of the people that would add to the art and culture of the city move to where there’s more opportunity or the cost of living is lower.
April 4th, 2008 at 2:15 pm
April 4th, 2008 at 2:18 pm
April 4th, 2008 at 2:30 pm
April 4th, 2008 at 2:48 pm
April 4th, 2008 at 2:52 pm
.
The only effect the Olympics have had on our economy was inflating construction costs of all those new condos. That’s all history, as the olympic portion of all that costruction is winding down, and those costly condos are not selling.
Our market will have crashed and bottomed by 2010, and looking for excuses to resume the uptrend.
April 4th, 2008 at 3:18 pm
April 4th, 2008 at 3:27 pm